Guided Missile

This might explain the desire of most of the posters on this site to move on...

The issue is not whether an individual like Stephen Fry, or anyone else for that matter, has the right to criticise a foreign nation with regard to their treatment of a particular minority. It is the fact that he tries to evoke the national pride in the way we, as a nation ran the last Olympics and wants the Prime Minister to lecture someone on their behaviour as if we, AS A NATION, have the moral high ground, apparently because there was a complete lack of gay bashing in the Olympic Park in 2012.

The issue is not whether an individual like Stephen Fry, or anyone else for that matter, has the right to criticise a foreign nation with regard to their treatment of a particular minority. It is the fact that he tries to evoke the national pride in the way we, as a nation ran the last Olympics and wants the Prime Minister to lecture someone on their behaviour as if we, AS A NATION, have the moral high ground, apparently because there was a complete lack of gay bashing in the Olympic Park in 2012. He should take a leaf out of Peter Tatchell's book, with regard to this issue, i.e.: In May 2006 Tatchell attended the first Moscow Pride Festival. He appears in the documentary Moscow Pride '06 featuring this event. "In May 2007 Tatchell returned to Moscow to support Moscow Pride and to voice his opposition to a ban on the march. On 27 May 2007, Tatchell and other gay rights activists were attacked. He was punched in the face and nearly knocked unconscious, while other demonstrators were beaten, kicked and assaulted.[35] A German MP, Volker Beck, and a European Parliament deputy from Italy, Marco Cappato, were also punched before being arrested and questioned by police.[36] Tatchell later said "I'm not deterred one iota from coming back to protest in Moscow."[37] On 16 May 2009, the day of the final of the Eurovision Song Contest in Moscow, Russian gay rights activists staged a protest in Moscow in defiance of the city's mayor, Yuri Luzkhov, who had long banned gay demonstrations and denounced them as "satanic".[38] Tatchell was among 32 campaigners arrested when they shouted slogans and unfurled banners" What has Stephen Fry done in regard to this issue, about which he is so passionate? The usual, really. Writes an angry letter, and then hides behind David Cameron's skirt.

I can't recall anyone in this country doing anything about Hitler apart from appeasing him when he was persecuting minorities - apart from the great Winston Churchill. It was the invasion of Poland that finally started us off and that was nothing to do with our opinion of right wing policies of Germany in the 30's. Anyway, my point is that someone like Stephen Fry has no right lecturing Russian society on their attitude towards gays, given this countries appalling recent treatment of homosexuals.

Upset a left-wing, comedic ex-fraudster so much that he now professes utmost respect for a right wing British politician. He also seems to have forgotten how this country jailed Oscar Wilde at the same time that Russia granted Tchaikovsky a large government pension. Stephen Fry is really starting to get on my nerves, every time I see the smart arse, wallowing in demonstrating his ability to memorise the contents of the Encyclopedia Brittanica. Undisputed king of the pub-quiz but an odious load-mouthed luvvie IMHO...

Spare us the self-righteous sermonizing on behalf of our country please Stephen and remember that after the 1948 Olympics that we hosted, it took nearly 20 years for England and Wales to decriminalise homosexuality. Scotland didn't decriminalise it until 1980 and Northern Ireland in 1982.

The distribution out of reserves from capital contributions (cash and stock) is free of Swiss withholding tax and will not be subject to income tax for Swiss resident individuals holding the shares as a private investment.

The transfer of capital that occured is from the share premium account and represents the "premium" that was paid for the shares over their par value, by the Liebherrs. Why did they do it? My guess, not being a corporate accountant but just thinking about their situation, is that it shifts the overvalue into distributable reserves, e.g. retained profits, so that they can take dividends out of the company when we have the cash, OR the reduction in value of their shares provides some form of tax relief for the Liebherrs. My guess, but I am sure we have an accountant on this board that knows more than me.... Um Pahars, where are you????

I think my favourite Tijuana Tim post was this classic: You just have to love him...a credit to ex-pats everywhere...

Bored out and shooting ball bearings. Killed the next door neighbours cat while testing it, I seem to recall...

Pretty much accords with my opinion, although it is tough for most of the herd on here, to be similarly objective... Can't wait to hear the bleating of the sheep... Spend, spend, spend... (After all, it's not our money...)

Pompous Windbag... Harry Truman dropped the bomb on Hiroshima..

Couldn't find a "tongue in cheek" emoticon...

Since the purchase of the club by the Liebherr's, Cortese has run the club as his personal fiefdom. His attitude towards many of those involved with the club and others outside, with which he disagrees, has all the hallmarks you would expect from a short Italian given too much power. The main problem, is that most chairman with his attitude, actually have the money to ruffle the feathers that give him the added stature he craves. The club has been successful on the pitch due in large part to the managers, players and playing staff. The business has been financially successful due to the strict control over costs and the massive increase in non-matchday income from Sky, due to the success on the pitch. The owners will be making a big mistake to cave in to an employee who increasingly confuses the role of a Chairman with that of a Dictator. I think they only have two choices: Sell the club to new owners who will understand that with investment, there are many financially trained Chairman who can do Cortese's job, without the ongoing damage to the club's reputation. Get rid of Cortese and back a new Chairman, with the investment the club requires to meet any ambitions they have. The poll above provides pretty much the same result as when Adkins was fired. It only serves, as does the Pompey Takeover Thread, how detached from reality you become, when you spend too much time on internet forums. Whoever they get in, I will still turn up, like most other fans. My loyalty is to the team. I am just dreaming of Wenger taking over as Chairman and the Liebherr's financing a new stadium....

Apparently those Pompey fans that saved their club from extinction, are going to be faced with a large number of problems that could mean that the club either goes into administration again, or at least gets relegated to the Conference. What a bunch of useless fans and a cr @p club they are and won't it be funny if they all lose all the money that they invested and have no club to support. Our fans are so much better than theirs and we will all be so amused at every mistake they make and every misfortune that befalls them, etc., etc., There, I'm done with this thread. Feel free to cut and paste the above. It summarises most of which will follow this post....

The takeover is complete and the topic of the thread is history. Time to move this to Golden Posts and start a new one in support of local football fans saving Pompey...

It's taken me this long to be be slightly annoyed about it. There is a reason schadenfreude is before sh !t and syphilis in the dictionary...[h=1][/h]

I wasn't saying they weren't in a vulnerable position. Just no more vulnerable than the majority of other football clubs and less vulnerable than us when we banked at Barclays. Wish them well and move on. Making sh !t up and exaggerating potential future problems makes us look pathetic. We are lucky with our owners. That should be enough. The takeover is over. End of thread...

I understand that this thread is an opportunity to have a lighthearted swipe at Pompey and their fans, but I really think this thread has served it's purpose and the entertainment value has worn thin. Why? Well for one thing, the fans and their backers have achieved the near impossible and saved the club from liquidation. Not much entertainment value there, if your a Saints fan, just grudging admiration. This post just shows the desperation for trying to find some flaw in the structure of the deal. To be honest, it isn't hard, but that said, we are talking about football, which is not a real business, anyway. For them to have any sort of structure is enough for them, rightly, to be proud of and this cr @p about them being in a vulnerable position if they don't meet their obligations to their backers just confounds me. I would rather have had the position they are in, than ours when the sh !ts at Barclays started getting anxious and then pulled the plug. Jesus, just wish them well and shut the thread down. We are really starting to sound pathetic....

Can we run this poll again...?

Apparently he published this on an Islamic website: "When the Brighton bomb went off, I felt a surge of excitement at the nearness of Margaret Thatcher's demise and yet disappointment that such a chance had been missed. ‘Why did she have to leave the bathroom two minutes earlier?’ I asked myself.” In the same publication he also said he wished Argentina had won the Falklands War, which claimed the lives of 255 British servicemen.”

Pochettino inherited a better chairman than Adkins has.

El Cash-he-go

Out on bail.